[Global_chapter_committee] [Owasp-board] Results of Feb GCC Action items from the board

Seba seba at owasp.org
Wed Feb 16 02:29:47 EST 2011


Before approving this, Is suggest discussing the profit cap with the
chapters committee (also putting the global chapters committee in the
recipient list).
There is some bad blood with  chapters that organized an event and now
see their 'profit' disappear in the general conferences bucket.
In the end this is all foundation budget, but perception is very important.

Putting on my chapters committee hat:
I don't have a problem with the conferences committee putting in place
governance over the global and regional events, but when chapters
organize local events that needs to be overseen by the chapters


On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Mark Bristow <mark.bristow at owasp.org> wrote:
> OWASP Board,
> As a result of our meeting during the summit, you had asked us to make final
> resolutions on a few items.
> Chapter Profit Sharing Model
> Now, with a greater understanding that budgetary and inter-committee items
> should be run through the board for concurrence here is the plan as approved
> by the GCC for an event profit sharing model.  It's important to note that
> currently there is NO official model (despite what you may have heard) at
> least in the committee's view.  Also as discussed, much debate that is
> better surmised in a teleconference went into this conclusion, should you
> require it, I will happily work with you all to set up a time.  We look
> forward to your vote on this subject.
>> Local host chapters will share in OWASP event profits under the following
>> schedule. In the case of multiple host chapters, the host chapters will be
>> responsible for determining the division before the event.
>> Global AppSec Conference - 25% of event profits with a $5,000 USD cap
>> ($10,000 for multi-chapter events)
>> Regional/Theme Events - 30% of event profits with a $4,000 USD cap
>> Local Events - 50% of profits with a $3000 USD cap
> GCC Representative Roles and Responsibilities at Events
> The GCC will now send a representative to all Global AppSec Events and to
> other regional events as budget allows.  This member of the GCC will be
> identified early and assigned to liaise with the conference planners and
> provide a single point of contact for interfacing with the committee.  They
> will also work with Dave to go through "training" for signature authority on
> contracts less than or equal to $15,000 USD in the scope of the assigned
> conference.  While on-site the GCC representative will provide logistical,
> contracting and other on-site support as well as report back to the
> committee in the following areas (from the GCC 2011 Comprehensive plan):
> GCC member shall:
> interface with the local planning committee at least 1 month before trip
> (attend planning call)
> Interact with planners/attendees while at conference
> Interact with Sponsors
> Sign conference contracts under $15,000 (once approved)
> At the next GCC meeting the traveling member will be expected to provide an
> post trip report covering
> Assessment of facility
> Event Marketing Strategy
> Examination of Event Budget
> Estimation of Speaker Quality
> Sponsor engagement/cost-effectiveness & feedback
> Any notable comments from planners/attendees
> Any unique outstanding elements
> Any issues
> GCC Representative Funding
> The board had asked the GCC to discuss the funding mechanism for GCC
> representation at events (GCC budget or against individual conferences).
> This was discussed and voted upon at the Feb GCC meeting and the committee
> decided that it would be best to manage these funds out of a GCC travel
> budget for supporting events.  The GCC felt that, as at the end of the day
> it's all the foundation's money, the benefits of rolling this travel under
> the conference budget (therefore showing more "expenses" to their budget,
> allegedly encouraging them to earn more money to break "even") did not
> outweigh the "perceived" costs of offering conferences direct on-site
> support and then "charging" them for it.  As the travel costs are likely to
> have a small impact on a Global AppSec Budget (approx $2000/trip) it's not
> likely going to impact the bottom line of the conference and would not
> likely be the sole motivating factor for planners to get additional
> sponsorship income.  The potential soft costs to the ability of the GCC to
> conduct it's oversight role may be significantly impacted by making the
> planners pay a "tax" that is wholly  internal to the organizations
> accounting and has no real allocation.  Additionally, in the cases where a
> conference planner said "thanks but no thanks" to a GCC rep at their
> conference, the larger goals of better contract management, event feedback
> and assessments would not be achieved.  In short, the GCC recommends to the
> board that this funding stream be placed under the GCC budget as originally
> requested in the amount of $10,000.
> In addition to these items, I just wanted to make you all aware that we are
> working on making some changes to the OWASP conference sponsorship model to
> allow for "Global" sponsors.  We feel this will increase the net profits
> from conferences but as it is a budgetary item, the GCC will pass a draft to
> the board for consideration.
> Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
> Regards,
> -Mark
> --
> Mark Bristow
> (703) 596-5175
> mark.bristow at owasp.org
> OWASP Global Conferences Committee Chair - http://is.gd/5MTvF
> OWASP DC Chapter Co-Chair - http://is.gd/5MTwu
> AppSec DC Organizer - https://www.appsecdc.org
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board

More information about the Global_chapter_committee mailing list